- 1 day ago
Senior Defense Advisor Jeffrey H Fischer, speaking in an exclusive interview with India Today TV, reflected on the resignation of Joe Kent, former head of the US National Counter-terrorism Center, who stepped down over the war with Iran.
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00Good evening, hello and welcome. You're with the news today, your primetime destination news,
00:04newsmakers, talking points. The big talking point tonight, regime change, Israel's only war
00:11objective. On a day when more leaders of the Iranian regime are taken out or assassinated,
00:18Israel ambassador Ruvid Azhar is among my special guests tonight. He spoke to me earlier in the
00:25studio. Also, Taliban claim 400 deaths have taken place in their country after a Pakistan airstrike,
00:33many of them civilians. We'll look at that too. And among my other special guests, just out of
00:38prison after 170 days, Sonam Vangchuk will tell us what he now intends to do. Plenty as always on
00:47India's number one primetime show. But first, as always, it's time for the nine headlines.
00:55Huge setback for Donald Trump amidst the raging war in Iran. U.S. counter-terrorism chief quits claims
01:02U.S. posed no imminent threat from Iran. Conflict began under pressure from Israel and the pro-Israel
01:09lobby in America. Israel claims to have killed Iran's security chief Ali Larijani and Bastia
01:23militia unit commander Netanyahu calls it a move to destabilize Iranian leadership. Tehran yet to
01:30confirm or deny Larijani's death. He could be the next big leader after Khamenei to have been
01:39assassinated. In an exclusive interview with India today, Israel's ambassador to India,
01:46Ruvin Azhar, says war will end when Iran either changes its policies or its leadership. It's a no-holds-barred
01:54interview with him. Another LPG tanker Nanda Devi arrives in India, but six Indian LPG tankers
02:03still stuck in the Persian Gulf. Center rides to states to help expedite pipe natural gas network
02:09expansion. Pakistan strikes hit a drug rehabilitation hospital in Kabul. Taliban slams Pakistan for killing
02:18over 400 people, many civilians in that strike. Islamabad rejects the claim.
02:26All of Cuba hit by blackouts as a power grid collapses amidst U.S. sanctions. Meanwhile,
02:32Donald Trump once again raises the possibility of a friendly takeover of Cuba.
02:39It's round two of Mamata Banerjee versus Suvendu Adhikari in West Bengal. Bengal chief minister
02:44Mamata Banerjee to contest from Baba Nipur in Kolkata against LOP Suvendu Adhikari in the West Bengal
02:51elections. Political controversy erupts after an AIA DMK MP, Shanmuga makes a crass comment against
02:59actor Nayantara to target Chief Minister Stalin. DMK condemns the statement, calls it inappropriate
03:04and offensive. And six Ukrainians and a U.S. citizen are arrested by the NIA for entering restricted
03:15areas in Mizoram, crossing into Myanmar and engaging with insurgent groups. Ukraine lodges official
03:21protest demands immediate release.
03:38The big story that we are breaking at the moment, there's been a big setback, a huge setback for
03:43Donald Trump amidst the raging war in West Asia. The U.S. counter-terror chief has now resigned
03:53from his post. Can't support ongoing war with Iran is what Joe Kent, who is the U.N. counter-terrorism
04:03chief, has said. Joe Kent in a letter has written to the president saying, Iran posed no imminent threat
04:10to the United States. He goes on to add that war began under pressure from Israel and its pro-American
04:18lobby there. He also says his conscience no longer allows him to support a war, which he says is
04:24bringing no good to the United States. It has no benefit to the United States, making it very clear
04:30that the imminent threat that Donald Trump claimed was being posed by Iran was one big lie. This is
04:38the senior most official in the counter-terrorism group of the U.S., who has now resigned, thereby
04:45putting another question mark over whether this is a war that Donald Trump is waging without a
04:52strategy. More will be coming on that big story. But for now, Joe Kent's resignation has now sparked
04:59off a heated debate in the United States over where this war is headed. Meanwhile, Israel, the other key
05:06player in this war has gone ahead and eliminated reportedly another key major face of the Iranian
05:14regime. Israel claimed that they have killed Iran's security chief Ali Lali Jani in a strike. Israeli
05:21Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has reiterated the claim of Lali Jani, who headed the security
05:27establishment of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards after the defense minister also had said
05:34so. Lali Jani was last seen in public on Friday at a march on Quds Day. So far, Iran has
05:42not confirmed
05:43whether their security head has been killed in an attack. More on this in our top story.
06:03A dramatic new twist in the escalating war between the United States, Israel and Iran.
06:11Israel is now claiming it has eliminated one of Iran's most powerful leaders. Ali Lali Jani,
06:17the head of the regime's National Security Council, was killed in an Israeli airstrike inside Iran.
06:26This morning, we eliminated Ali Lali Jani. Ali Lali Jani is the boss of the Revolutionary Guards,
06:31which is a gang of gangsters that in practice runs Iran. Alongside him, we also eliminated the
06:38commander of the passage, the helpers of the gangsters, who spread terror in the streets of Tehran
06:43and other Iranian cities against the population. We are operating there as well. Operating from the
06:49air with Air Force aircraft and with UAVs.
06:55Tehran has neither confirmed nor denied the claim. After Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei's death,
07:01Lali Jani emerged as a key figure in Tehran, coordinating Iran's wartime strategy.
07:06But even as Israel claims Lali Jani has been eliminated,
07:09a handwritten message released by his office is raising questions.
07:13The message is dated around the 16th or 17th of March,
07:17leaving it unclear whether it was written before or after the alleged Israeli strike.
07:29As claims and counterclaims continue, the war between Israel, the United States and Iran
07:34is entering an even more unpredictable phase. Key question remains unanswered. Is Iran's
07:40leadership truly decapitated or is the war only escalating further?
07:45Bureau Report, India Today.
07:51And earlier today, I spoke to the Israeli ambassador to India, Ruvin Azhar, to ask him just exactly
07:58what Israel's objective now was after the killing, alleged killing, of the top Iranian security
08:05officials. Listen in.
08:13The West Asia war enters week three and shows no signs of letting up. If anything, the war
08:21seems to be escalating even further. I was joined earlier by a very special guest. My special guest
08:27guest is the Israeli ambassador to India. Mr. Ruvin Azhar is with us here on India Today. Appreciate
08:36you're joining us, Mr. Azhar. Just in the last 24 hours, Israel claims it has killed the top Iranian
08:43security official, Ali Lali Jani, in overnight strikes. Israel claims that Ghulam Reza Soleimani,
08:51the deputy commander of the Basij, the Iranian paramilitary force, has also been killed in airstrikes.
08:56Is Israel only upping the ante against Iran now?
09:01Well, it seems, Rajdeep, that as time passes, our penetration into Tehran, into Iran, gets only
09:09deeper. And that this regime is really shaken, that we have managed, thanks to the efforts of our
09:16security forces, to undermine and to damage the power of this regime in a very serious way. And we intend
09:25to continue. But the fact is, and I read a Washington Post article today which said that
09:30American intelligence says Iran's regime is consolidating despite the withering strikes of
09:36Israel and America. Officials see a weakened but more hardline government in Tehran,
09:42backed by the powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. So while you're killing or you're taking out
09:47these leaders, the fact is, or assassinating them, the fact is, the regime is still very much in place.
09:54Well, first of all, we'll see what they're right tomorrow. But it seems to us that it's pretty natural
10:00that at the first stage, these people will double down because this is the only thing they know.
10:07They've been fanatic, they've been oppressing their own people, they've been, you know, creating this machinery of death
10:14throughout the last 30 years. And they've been getting more and more fanatic, regardless of what we did in the
10:20past.
10:20So at the end of the day, if you want to win this war, you have to increase the efforts
10:27to undermine
10:28their capability to continue to build what they want to build, a machinery that will control
10:34our region and the capability to annihilate the state of Israel.
10:39But Ambassador, you use the word win the war. What does win the war mean? Let's be very clear.
10:46What does win the war mean for Israel?
10:48Well, we said it very clearly at the outset, Rajiv. We want to make sure that Iran is not capable
10:55of creating
10:56a military nuclear arsenal. We are very, very stubborn that Iran won't have the capability to have tens of
11:06thousands of ballistic missiles, because that's also an existential threat on Israel, and we wanted to stop
11:11supporting the proxies. Now, there are two options here. One option that was there for 30 years
11:17is that through diplomatic efforts, they will change course. They will decide that they no longer want to
11:24exterminate the state of Israel. The other option that unfortunately we got to now, we are not enjoying it,
11:32is that we debilitate them substantially. But we also added a third element. We said, you know what,
11:39we cannot ourselves change the regime in Iran, but we are going to make sure that the Iranian people
11:45have a chance to embrace their future if they choose to do so. But it's also possible that the Iranian
11:50people will only further consolidate behind the regime. You are striking a sovereign nation.
11:55Why should the Iranian people listen to what Israel decides for them? Who is Israel, they could argue,
12:02to arrogate the right to decide what regime will sit in Tehran? That's for the people of Iran to decide,
12:07not for the government in Jerusalem. Exactly. I agree with you. And that's why we are not saying that
12:12we are going to change the regime ourselves. This is going to be the decision of the people that are
12:17being oppressed, the millions of people that are being oppressed by this regime, tens of thousands of
12:22people that have been killed by this regime only a few weeks ago. There are millions and millions of
12:27people, believe me, Rajdeep, that want to see this regime out. There are nations in this region that
12:32are waiting for the day in which this regime will fall because they understand, and we understand.
12:39We've been, we are also a sovereign nation. We've been attacked by this regime for the last 37 years,
12:45time and again. Our embassies were bombarded. Today, 17th of March, is the commemoration day of
12:51the explosion of our embassy in Buenos Aires. So these people are doing these terrible deeds
12:57for decades now. No, no, but again, I come back to it, Ambassador, the end game. What is the end
13:02game? Is it regime change? I mean, whether the Iranian people do it or whether Israel and America
13:07try and affect it, is that the end goal? Because with Donald Trump, we don't see clarity on that.
13:14Does he want regime change? Does he want a denuclearized Iran? There's, his goalposts keep changing.
13:20Is this now a war being fought by Israel under Netanyahu's leadership, and you're virtually
13:26forcing the Americans to tag along? Because America isn't ready for the long war that you
13:30seemingly are.
13:31Well, first of all, we are completely in sync with the Americans.
13:34You're completely in sync with the Americans. You don't accept that this is Netanyahu's war,
13:39which Trump is being pushed along with.
13:41Let's be serious, Rajdeep. No country in the world, especially not the United States, which
13:46is the most powerful country in the world, is acting on the behalf of other countries.
13:50Okay? People who believe that, I think they live in an alternative world.
13:53The United States is doing this because it's in the interest of the United States, according
13:57to the people that are administering that administration at this point.
14:01Okay? Now, the end game could be either the substantial debilitation of this regime
14:08or can be a change within the policy of the regime or a regime change.
14:13We don't know yet. But what we want to achieve, and we had actually no choice but to do it
14:19now, is to remove the existential threats. Because they were immediate. They were going
14:26to go immune underground to a situation which we cannot hit.
14:31How is it an imminent threat? You said at the very outset that you were hopeful that diplomacy
14:37would work. The fact is there were negotiations going on in Geneva. Even as those negotiations
14:43are going, you go and target Iran. What is one to understand, Mr. Ambassador?
14:47Because the negotiations weren't serious, Rajdeep.
14:50Because they...
14:50They were not serious on your part or their part?
14:52First of all, we were not part of it.
14:54Yeah. I mean, you believe the Iranians were not serious about the negotiation.
14:56The Iranians were refusing to negotiate the ballistic missile program. They were refusing
15:00to negotiate their support for the proxies. And they were refusing to the American demands
15:06to export the enriched uranium and to get zero enrichment. Because they don't deserve to enrich.
15:12Because they cheated the international system. So they were playing for time. Like they were
15:16doing throughout the last 30 years.
15:18But what was this imminent threat that meant that you had to now go in now? What was this
15:23imminent threat?
15:24Yes. I want to be very clear about this. When we attacked back in June, it was because
15:29we knew out from our intelligence that they decided to sneak out a nuclear weapon. Now, what
15:37we saw is that they are actually making, in the midst of an effort, to bury very deep underground
15:43both their capability to produce nuclear weapons and the ballistic missile production. And we knew
15:49that if we don't act now, in coordination with the United States, they will get this immunity.
15:55And we will continue to have to live with this existential threat that was imminent for us.
16:01How will you respond to those, Ambassador, who say this is not a just war? This is an illegal
16:06aggression. It is not sanctioned in the case of United States by the Congress that Israel unilaterally
16:13decided that there is an imminent threat and has targeted a sovereign nation of Iran. Iran didn't attack
16:18you. You attacked Iran. Well, Iran has been attacking us, Rajdeep, for the last 37 years illegally. They
16:25have sworn to annihilate us. They decided every bullet and every terror attack and every missile and every
16:31rocket and every drone that has been flying over Israel from Gaza or from Lebanon or from Iraq or from
16:36Yemen or from Iran has been either financed by Iran, produced by Iran. The people who produced it,
16:44they were trained in Iran. So nobody can tell us that we don't have the right to defend ourselves
16:50against those that for no reason whatsoever have decided that they want to destroy us from day one.
16:57Tell me, Mr. Ambassador, has Israel been taken by surprise by the manner in which Iran has used
17:05missiles and drones to spread the theater of war? UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, parts of Saudi Arabia,
17:15all under the the lens of Iraqi, Iranian missiles and drones. Have you all been taken by surprise
17:21at the manner in which Iran is raising the costs of war? Well, to a certain extent, yes. I think
17:26that
17:26they did a huge miscalculation because they thought that by expanding, by attacking all the so-called
17:31friends that they have, okay, they have actually created a situation in which instead of getting
17:39garnering support for their costs, they have been garnering condemnation from the entire
17:44international community. You saw that the UN Security Council just at the beginning of this week
17:48passed a resolution with overwhelming majority and with the with the backing of 130 countries
17:55condemning them. And this resolution was co-sponsored by India, by the way. But we are also, I'll come to
18:00India in a moment, but we are also seeing, Mr. Ambassador, the fact is, NATO allies of the
18:06United States are not willing to enter the theater of war. The United Kingdom, for example, has made
18:10it clear. Other countries are also saying we are not going to send our warships into the Straits of
18:14Hormuz. All these countries that have been attacked by Israel through drones and missiles, the Arab
18:19countries are not necessarily siding with Israel. The point of the matter is... Are you sure? No, they haven't
18:24officially. None of them have officially said that we are on the side of Israel. Show me one of the
18:30Arab countries that have said, we are with Israel in this war. They may be condemning Iran for their
18:35recklessness. That doesn't necessarily mean they're siding with Israel. Is this actually about Israel
18:40trying to establish its dominance over West Asia? And many of the other countries are not willing to
18:45join your war with Iran. They're worried that this will only result in oil prices going up. They're just
18:50worried about the costs of war. No one wants feet on the ground in Iran, for example. First of all,
18:57we never asked any country to fight for us. We are fighting for ourselves. And this...
19:02You asked the United States. No, we didn't. This is a joint operation that comes out from common interest.
19:10And what Israel has done is not only approved by the Israeli cabinet, it has been approved also by the
19:16Israeli opposition that have seen the intelligence that I am telling you about. We have done this because
19:22we had no choice, because we cannot live with an existential threat that is imminent from a country
19:28that wants to destroy us. Now, the Arab countries, you know, you are an experienced journalist. You know
19:34how the politics of the Middle East, you know, work, how the Islamic and the Arab world work. And you
19:40have to
19:40read between the lines. The Arab countries on the Gulf completely support the extermination of this threat.
19:49completely. Do they support Israel? It's one thing to say they don't support Iran. Do they support
19:54Israel? They support themselves. They support themselves. Look, we have to be, you know, there's a real
20:02politic here angle that you have to look at, okay? These countries have been living under the shadow
20:09of an Iranian threat for many years. Their infrastructure was attacked only now. May I remind you that the
20:18Iranians attacked Aramco five years ago, okay? So they know very well, and they invested billions
20:24of dollars in buying defense systems, including from Israel, to defend themselves from this threat.
20:31Does that give you a license, Mr. Ambassador, to attack Lebanon in which civilians have died? Does that
20:39give you a license to take out, to assassinate an Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader of Iran? Do you believe
20:45that all that has happened, as you say over the years, the so-called existential threat,
20:48as you call it, does that allow you to enter Lebanon, where hundreds of people have died,
20:52scores of people have died? We were attacked by Hezbollah. You were, you, are you able to make
20:57the distinction between Hezbollah and civilians? To give Iran's example, Mr. Ambassador, 165 school
21:02children in a school in Iran died. Who's responsible? Who's accountable? When civilians die in Lebanon,
21:09who's responsible? Can you make a distinction in a war like this between the militias, the so-called
21:14proxies of Iran and the people of Lebanon, or indeed the people of Iran? Well, first of all, Israel
21:21targets military targets. And when you look at the way... 165 school girls are not a military target. It's a
21:27very, very tragic incident we are not responsible for. And this incident, which is very tragic,
21:34does not represent the fact that we have hit more than 7,000 military targets. Okay? It is not our
21:41policy
21:42to target civilians. This incident in wars may happen. It's terrible. We have to do whatever we can
21:52to avoid them. We try to avoid this war because we know what is the cost of war for us,
21:58for the Israeli
21:59people, for the Israeli civilians that have been attacked time and again by the Iranians. Hezbollah,
22:05twice, on the 8th of October, and also now, have unilaterally decided to attack us.
22:12We retaliated. We are defending ourselves. Hezbollah has chosen to embed itself within civilian population.
22:20And it's very hard to make this distinction, but we are doing the best that we can.
22:24I just want to understand, are you saying, therefore, that you have every right to assassinate
22:31Ali Khamenei? Of course. That you believe? He gave direct orders, direct orders to create
22:37these threats against us. He was talking with foreign leaders about the need to annihilate us.
22:41He was in charge of the IRGC. He was in charge of Qasem Soleimani. He was the driver of all
22:50this killing
22:50that was happening, not only in Israel, in Arab capitals, in Arab countries. Several countries have
22:57condoled his death, from Russia to China to large parts of the world have condoled the death of Ali Khamenei.
23:02How many Muslim countries have given condolences following the death of Khamenei? Do you know?
23:07Out of 57 Muslim countries. How many? 11. That tells you something.
23:15Let's come to India. Do you believe that India is standing by Israel and America here? Because
23:22over the last few days, the Indian foreign minister has been in regular touch with his Iranian
23:28counterpart. One of our concerns, of course, is getting our ships through the Straits of Hormuz.
23:33We have interests in Iran. There are students, Indian students down there. Are you getting a sense
23:37now that India is very cautious of playing a more balanced role? Are you perfectly okay with that?
23:43Rajdeep, I'll tell you something you already know. India stands for India. And India will do whatever
23:48is good for India. We appreciate that India is an independent country that has their own policy. We
23:55happen to have a lot of common interests with India, which we'll continue to pursue. And India will
24:00continue to pursue their interests. I don't see a problem here. What will you tell those who say
24:05that the prime minister of India, Narendra Modi should not have gone to Israel on the eve of the war,
24:10that war clouds were gathering, it was the wrong sign, sending out the wrong message, that India
24:15abandoned its neutrality and chose to side in those early days with Israel and America, and therefore
24:22abandoned the principle of neutrality, which is the basis of our foreign policy. In our national interest,
24:27we should have been more careful. Well, that's an internal debate. I'm not part of that internal
24:31debate. What I know is that we didn't know that we would attack Iran only two days after
24:37Prime Minister Narendra Modi left, because the opportunity…
24:42You are telling me that Israel had no plans to attack Iran while the prime minister was in Israel?
24:48We didn't have the operational opportunity clear. Only two days after he left, we got the operational
24:57opportunity and our cabinet decided to do the attack at the timing that we did. Okay? We didn't know
25:03while Prime Minister Modi was visiting Israel, this is going to happen that soon.
25:07How do you see the reach out though to Iran? India's reach out to Iran, the constant conversations that
25:13we are now having with the Iranian foreign minister, the concern that India has expressed that they
25:18would like an immediate de-escalation of the war. I can understand anybody that is interested in
25:24de-escalation. We are interested in de-escalation. You're not de-escalating. You've just gone and
25:29targeted two more senior Iranian officials. That's my problem. How do you talk of de-escalation? You're
25:36escalating the war by the day. Because we won't de-escalate until there is a change in Iran.
25:42So you're coming back to regime change. You see, you're saying… A change in policy. It can be a
25:46change in policy. What does change in policy mean? You want a moderate regime which will follow what
25:50Israel does? There is a very clear diplomatic path that has been put forward before this entire thing
25:57happened. Before June, the United States has told the Iranians, you have to take the nuclear
26:03material out of Iran. You have to stop enrichment. You have to curb your ballistic missile program.
26:08You have to stop the support for the proxies. They haven't changed that a bit. When that changes,
26:14there will be de-escalation. So what happens if Donald Trump tomorrow
26:17tells the Israeli prime minister, look, we've achieved what we think, the United States thinks,
26:23are our primary goals here. We've decimated a large part of the Iranian leadership. We are
26:28pulling back. Will Israel continue the war? Will Israel continue the war independent of what the
26:34United States decides? Well, first of all, we are in sync with the United States, as I told you.
26:38Okay? There are two options here. One option is that we exhaust all the military means that we
26:44have planned together with the United States, and we stop. That is one option. The other option is that
26:50there is some kind of a change in the Iranian approach. We hope for the second.
26:55May I ask you? And I'll tell you why. Because at the end of the day, we also realize that
27:00if we don't
27:01want to pound this regime time and again, it's better to have a policy change.
27:07A policy change or surrender? Are you calling for surrender? Are you saying that
27:11Iran has to throw a white flag? Is that what you're suggesting? This term, what do you mean
27:16to throw a black... No, you're saying policy change. A policy change is very clear. There are conditions,
27:21diplomatic conditions. It's not a surrender. It's a matter of perspective. At the end of the day,
27:27this threat that they have been creating has been a threat against the United States, against Israel,
27:32against the region. The entire region and countries outside the region have been trying to convince this
27:38regime to change policy for so long. They have failed. That's why we have reached this point, because
27:46we cannot wait anymore while they are burying their capabilities and while we are facing a situation
27:55in which we will be able to annihilate us by will. We cannot agree to that. That has to change.
28:02So either they get debilitated and then we will go to the next round, I don't know when, maybe five
28:08years
28:08from now, three years from now, or that there is either a change of policy or a change in the
28:14regime or
28:14a change of the regime that actually make us no need to attack that kind of intention again.
28:24I take your point, but over the last couple of weeks, what's happened? Ali Khamenei has been replaced
28:28by his son, Mujtaba. So there's no sign of change in the leadership that you're talking about. There's no
28:33sign that they've changed their policy. They're still using their ballistic missiles and drones to
28:37target different parts of West Asia. They've made it very clear that they're going to keep the
28:42streets of Hormuz closed. That's a worried large parts of the West. There's a worry over oil prices
28:47going out of control. You know, this, as one headline put it, according as from an American
28:53perspective, is a war without a strategy. Do you agree with that or not? No, I don't think so. It's
28:58a war with a strategy?
28:59Yes. I think that it is very clear that we have very clear goals. One Khamenei replaced by another.
29:04What changes? What's changed in the last couple of weeks, Mr. Ambassador? I'll tell you. First of all,
29:09that the capabilities that Iran has to damage us and the rest of the region have been degraded
29:17by almost 80 percent. And that is very significant. You know, I thought it very interesting. Your prime
29:23minister today has wished the people of Iran on Navroz, which is that. Is the attempt being made to hope
29:29that there is a people's uprising? There's no sign of that. There's no sign at the moment of a
29:33people's uprising. Well, I'll tell you what are the signs, okay? First of all, the prime minister of
29:36Israel has been talking with Iranian people for the last 10 years. And he has been producing videos
29:42to the Iranian people in Farsi for the last 10 years. It's not something new, okay? Second, we are seeing
29:48cracks. Yes, we are seeing cracks. Because we see millions of people that are against this regime,
29:56because we are seeing that besiege people and army people are escaping their stance,
30:02okay, and surrendering. We are seeing that although this regime is doubling down, their capability
30:08to cause damage to their neighbors as to us and to us is diminishing dramatically. And therefore,
30:14I'm confident that we're going to achieve the goals of this world at the minimum
30:20and substantially degrading their capability to annihilate us. And if we get a political result
30:26or a diplomatic result, I think it's a bonus that everybody's interested in getting.
30:31Is the prime minister well? There were reports on social media floating about about the health
30:35of Benjamin Netanyahu? Well, if you have to judge by what he did today, I think he's not only alive,
30:41he's also kicking. What will you tell those who say Netanyahu is the ultimate warmonger? He's the one who's
30:47out to, in a way, set, establish his legacy, but destroy Iran as a result. I'll tell you a secret.
30:56The key for the success of the Abraham Accords and the seeds for the Abraham Accords were
31:07planted when the JCPOA happened. Because both Israel and Saudi Arabia and countries in the Gulf got to the
31:16conclusion that the diplomatic solution that was put then forward is actually not going to prevent Iran
31:24from building nuclear weapons, but it's going to pave the way for Iran for creating nuclear weapons.
31:30And that's the reason that we have been so stubborn in dealing with this threat. Because like our
31:39countries in the region, we are completely convinced that unless we take action to neutralize these threats,
31:46we will not exist. And that's why it's not just Prime Minister Netanyahu. It's the entire political
31:52system in Israel that supported this effort. Even if it results in hundreds of casualties,
31:56including civilians. It has resulted in hundreds and thousands of Israeli casualties.
32:02And it would result in millions of Israeli casualties if we didn't take action.
32:06My final question,
32:09Mr. Azhar, a month from now, if I invite you again to the studio, do you believe the war will
32:14still be on?
32:15Or do you hope that the war will be over sooner rather than later? What's your sense?
32:19I hope it will be over. I
32:22always will have the pleasure to come and visit you, whether the war continues or not.
32:25What's your sense, though?
32:26I don't know. I'm not a prophet. I'm not a son of a prophet. Because no, because Israel has said
32:30we are ready for a long war.
32:32That was the official statement two days ago. We are ready for a long war. What does a long war
32:35mean?
32:36It's a good question. I think that we are going to exhaust at some point
32:41the
32:43scope of the activity we wanted to have in Iran. I don't think that we're planning for a perpetual war.
32:49And I think that it's up to the decision makers, according to the operational considerations,
32:54to decide when to stop. Okay.
32:58Mr. Ruben Azhar, Ambassador of Israel, always good to have you here and take all our questions.
33:03I really appreciate you joining us. The Israeli Ambassador, Ruben Azhar, joining us here on India Today.
33:16Meanwhile, more breaking news now coming in. Donald Trump has lashed out at his allies now over the Iran war.
33:23Donald Trump, whose National Counterterrorism Center chief has just resigned today, now says most of our
33:28NATO allies don't want to get involved with our military operation. We no longer need or desire
33:34assistance by the NATO countries or Japan, Australia or South Korea. Remember, Trump's outburst comes
33:40a day after he had asked these allies to send warships to the Straits of Hormuz on a day when
33:45his administration
33:46suffered a huge setback today. The US counterterror chief, Mr. Kent, resigning from his post, opposing the war.
33:54First major resignation from the Trump administration over a war that has continued to escalate. Remember,
34:01the counterterror chief, George Kent, claiming that Iran posed no imminent threat to the United States.
34:07That was a lie. He said and said that it was Israel that had pushed Trump into the war in
34:14Iran.
34:15So that's that's the big one coming in. Donald Trump now slowly once again losing his cool this time with
34:23his NATO allies, because many of them, particularly Britain, have said, no, we are not going to get involved
34:29with our warships in the Strait of Hormuz. Trump angrily now saying NATO not getting involved in the
34:36Iran war. I will fight this on my own. We don't need any help in Hormuz, he says. I have
34:42great,
34:43great support from the Middle East, he says, on this war. We didn't have to be there for Ukraine,
34:50he says. NATO is making a very foolish mistake. So very, very strong words coming in from Donald Trump
34:57at the moment. Remember, there's been a big setback for the US president amidst this raging war and his
35:03first comments clearly lashing out at his own NATO allies, even going to the extent to say that Macron
35:09won't be around the French president for too long. So clearly, Donald Trump has run out of patience,
35:16it seems, particularly with his allies. Let's go straight to Jeffrey Fisher, Colonel at the US Air Force,
35:24former diplomat and senior defense advisor, now joins us. Appreciate you joining us. Jeffrey
35:29Fisher, what's your first reaction to Donald Trump on a day when he's lost his national counterterrorism
35:34chief and said, I'm not part of this war, I'm resigning. Now the NATO allies versus Donald Trump,
35:41Donald Trump lashing out at them. What explains this? Is this a leader in command, or is the leader
35:46just losing it?
35:50Yeah, so first of all, thanks for having me. I think it's a little bit of both, right? I think
35:55if you
35:55look at Trump's first presidency, of the 65 senior officers that worked for him, 60 of them were
36:03replaced at any, you know, over those four years. So it's not uncommon for Donald Trump's love affairs
36:10to go bad with his staff and have people resign. I've read the letter. I would make a suggestion
36:18that I don't think it's going to be the only one. I think there's going to be others that are
36:22going
36:22to follow this. And I think, in part, it's because of the way the Trump administration
36:28came into the war, right? The way they entered this war.
36:33Just heard Donald Trump, Colonel Fischer say that on the resignation of Mr. Kent as the national
36:40counterterrorism director, it's a good thing he's out because he said Iran was not a threat. Now,
36:46that's, of course, playing with words. What Kent said, it's not an imminent threat that justified going
36:51to war. Do you believe that Donald Trump is the MAGA coalition, is getting increasingly divided,
36:58split wide open over the war the longer it goes on? Yeah, I think Donald Trump's put himself in
37:04a really tough situation, right? And what I mean by that is last June, we had Operation Midnight Hammer,
37:09where the Trump administration and the US intelligence came out and said that Iran's nuclear
37:16capabilities were completely destroyed. It would take years to rebuild these, right? I mean,
37:20that's what was said in June of last year. So it's somewhat hard to make the case that, you know,
37:26in February, less than one year later, they've rebuilt everything and they're nearly imminent to have
37:32a nuclear weapon. I understand what advisor Witkoff has said that when he talked to the Iranians,
37:38they said they were just, quote unquote, weeks away from having a nuclear capability. But I would also
37:44point out that in Iranian culture, lying to gain a strategic advantage is not
37:49uncommon. The Iranians are known to not necessarily always tell the truth. I would have liked to
37:55seen the Witkoff comments be backed up by and supported, you know, the Iranian comments were
38:00supported by US intelligence backing this up. We didn't hear that. So I think that, you know,
38:06the administration's in a tough situation. How do you how do you sell both stories is credible.
38:12So are you very quickly at the end, are you saying the longer this war continues,
38:16the more Donald Trump is going to find support for it, both within his MAGA coalition and indeed
38:22the people of the United States?
38:26I think his historically support for wars erode, right? They don't usually get stronger over time.
38:35And I've been to war seven times. I know what the people back home have felt. And I was in
38:40Afghanistan
38:40three times. I would say that, you know, the if you and I understand we have to go quickly, but
38:46I
38:46would point out that the way that the West has entered wars before Donald Trump was, you know,
38:52you gain consensus and a coalition and you work together to make the case, you go to the United
38:57Nations, you plea your case. And if all else fails, you go to war. In this case, right, we didn't
39:03see that.
39:04We saw a surprise attack, which I understand is a tenet of warfare. You wanted surprise if you were
39:11truly going to go after the regime's leadership. You probably couldn't do all the other things that
39:16I just mentioned. But that being said, it's somewhat hard to form a coalition after the eggs broke and
39:25we're already cooking the omelet.
39:26Okay, I'm going to leave it there, Colonel Fisher. I appreciate you joining us with your comments
39:32there on the resignation of the National Counterterrorism Center Chief. Thank you so much.
39:39Remember, that's not the only war that's being fought at the moment. Tensions now escalating
39:43between Pakistan and Afghanistan to an all-time high. Pakistan carrying out overnight airstrikes on
39:50Kabul that hit a drug rehabilitation hospital. Taliban there. The government claims at
39:56least 400 people, many of them civilians, were killed in the attack. The attack came
40:00hours after Afghan officials said that two sides exchanged fire along the common border. The drug
40:06rehab was hospital. One of the world's largest was totally destroyed in the strikes. It's led to
40:10widespread condemnation. Many are calling this a violation of Afghanistan's territory and a war crime,
40:16while Pakistan is denying the allegation that claiming their forces only targeted the Afghan
40:22military facilities. But clearly, this has pushed Pakistan once again on the back foot. The manner
40:28in which those airstrikes hit a hospital. Joining me now is Nilufa Ayyubi. She's a journalist and works
40:36with the Kabul senior fellow at the Kabul Institute. Appreciate your joining us, Nilufa. Your first reaction
40:42to what has happened overnight in Kabul? Lots of anger, we are told, in Afghanistan. 400 people killed in
40:48that airstrike on a hospital by the Pakistani airstrikes.
40:56Well, first of all, this is a clear violation of international law and this is nothing less
41:02than a war crime that Pakistan is committing against Afghan civilians. Unfortunately, this is not the first
41:09strike and I'm really sad to say that this will not be the last strike. Pakistan is very carefully
41:23executing the plan that they have been working on maybe for decades. First, they overthrew the
41:30republic through Taliban and then they try to shift the terrorist hub inside Afghanistan and through Taliban,
41:38they try to create Afghanistan, the new terrorist or terrorist state, as we can say. And now,
41:45all these attacks that we are seeing in Pakistan claiming that they're targeting the TTP leaders or the
41:53TTP bases or the Taliban, but we clearly see that there's no updates on any dates of the Taliban leaders
42:04or the
42:04Taliban officials or the TTP whatsoever. But what we have been seeing that is mass civilian casualties and
42:12also, you know, the strikes happening in Kabul is something that has shaken us, to be honest, to our core.
42:26It's shaken you, you're calling it a war crime, but given the military asymmetry between the Pakistani air
42:31power and Afghanistan's more limited capabilities, what do you think are the real options now for Afghanistan?
42:40Well, as I mentioned just now that this is, if this was Pakistan against Taliban, it wouldn't be
42:48targeting civilians. As you just mentioned that given the imbalance of military power, it would not be
42:58difficult for Pakistan to have this very specific targeted attacks. But we don't see that yet. All we
43:06see is this show that they have put on that, oh, we are fighting, we are clashing between each other.
43:12And in
43:12in this crossfire, it's the people of Afghanistan who are caught and who are paying the price. I don't believe
43:18this is a, this is a, this is a, this is an actual war, uh, between Taliban and Pakistan, but
43:23it's a war
43:24against the people of Afghanistan. And unfortunately, unfortunately, um, this is way beyond what we are, we are
43:31seeing in media and, and, and, and it's being described.
43:36War against the people of Afghanistan. Remember, the Pakistanis were once seen to be sponsors of the
43:43Taliban. Now, of course, uh, they seem to be at war with the Taliban, but more importantly, also the
43:49people of Afghanistan. Thanks very much, Niloufa, for joining me. I want to.
43:54Now watching the news today, justice of sorts, and I say of sorts, after nearly six months behind bars
44:01under the stringent National Security Act, Sonam Wangchuk, the celebrated Ladakhi activist, is
44:08finally free. Wangchuk was released, remember, from prison over the weekend after the center revoked
44:14his detention with immediate effect, bringing to an end to a long and controversial period in jail.
44:20Wangchuk was detained in September, 2025, the height of protests in Ladakh, protests that were demanding
44:25full statehood and constitutional safeguards under the sixth schedule. His arrest had sparked widespread
44:31outrage with activists and civil society groups, calling it a crackdown on peaceful descent.
44:37Today, let's listen in to Sonam Wangchuk out of jail now.
44:49And joining me now are two very special guests. Sonam Wangchuk joins me along with his wife,
44:55Gitanjali Angmo. Appreciate both of you joining us. Sonam, you're looking much thinner even though you're
45:00smiling. 170 days in detention under the National Security Act. Tell me first, what was your first
45:08thought when you stepped out of jail? What's the first thing that came to your mind?
45:14It was not as dramatically exciting as people think because I had come to terms, made up my mind for
45:25much longer. So, it was good. Good to meet her. Good to meet people. And today, good to meet you.
45:33But has it changed you? I'll come to you, Gitanjali, in a moment. But Sonam, has this 170 days detention,
45:39how has it changed you? Your activism, your commitment to the cause of Ladakh? Do you feel now that you've
45:46got to be a little bit more careful of the things you say, what you do?
45:51Well, generally, this experience was very special. People may think it must be like bad and damaging,
45:59but it was a very reflective, meditative, perhaps transformative experience to be in total isolation,
46:10thinking a lot, thinking a lot, reading, writing, and so on. But as for speaking and so on, I really
46:19don't think I had said anything wrong and it was misinterpreted as it now reveals layer after layer in the
46:29Supreme Court case.
46:30So, it's not that I will not say things that I say, but yeah, I hope that things will happen
46:39with dialogue as is the initiative now.
46:44But if really pushed to, we'll have to do similar struggles. But I really want to believe that there'll be
46:54much more discussion, dialogue, and the process will be positive.
46:58You don't sound angry. You don't sound as someone who's angry that I've lost 170 days of my life under
47:05the National Security Act,
47:07virtually be treated as some kind of an anti-national or seditionist. Where's the anger?
47:12No, no, no, no. Far from it. I'm actually… people find it very odd, but I'm grateful for this to
47:20happen.
47:20It was like a sabbatical for higher education, higher elevated spiritual maybe experience. So, I have no regrets whatsoever. In
47:32fact, I was telling some people that jail is not a bad idea.
47:37Everyone must, once in a lifetime, go to jail. If not for crime and things, but for a cause.
47:46That's what I would say. So, I have no regrets, no bitterness. In fact, I'm grateful I got the break
47:52that I had been looking for a decade or so to read and to write.
47:56And I did that and… yeah. So, I made the most of it.
48:01Okay. Yeah. Gitanjali, you know, he's sounding as if nothing has changed. But for you, it's been a difficult time
48:09going from hearing to hearing, knocking on the doors of lawyers and courts.
48:13Is there a sense of relief above all else, Gitanjali, that Sonam is back?
48:19Yes, it is a relief that that ordeal is over. But likewise, I don't have any bitterness.
48:26And because I had a different kind of learning, it was understanding the state in which our country is, the
48:34kind of reform is needed in judiciary,
48:36in prisons, in the way our, you know, society is structured. So, I also took it as a learning of
48:44what can be improved.
48:47And visiting him every week and giving him books written by those in jail, you know, motivating him to, you
48:54know, write a book, if not get enlightened, you know, by the time he's out.
48:59Because it's interesting, the revocation of his detention under NSA by the Ministry of Home Affairs came when the Supreme
49:08Court was about to hear possibly a final hearing.
49:10It almost seemed as if the government didn't want to go through that final hearing.
49:14Do you feel vindicated, Gitanjali? Do you feel a sense of vindication today?
49:21I would expect still that the legally the process goes to its logical conclusion, and a judgment is given so
49:29that it sets a precedent to other such cases, because it was a very finely fought case.
49:35It had a lot of legal nuances, it can become a case study in legal books, you know, and it
49:40can become a deterrent for others to not to have been taken in.
49:45But seeing the fact that today, again, the court did not set, I'm so grateful that this happened last week.
49:52Otherwise, I don't know how long it would have dragged.
49:55Yeah, that's right. They call it Tariq Pe Tariq in India.
49:58But Sonam, you know, your long-standing demands for Ladakh, six-scheduled protection, safeguards for land and jobs, some kind
50:06of statehood-like autonomy,
50:07are those still very much there. We saw some protests even yesterday in Ladakh taking place.
50:13So, the agitation presumably is not over. You want dialogue, you said, but if dialogue doesn't take place…
50:20No, no. Yeah, go ahead.
50:21We have always wanted dialogue. Actually, yesterday's rally in Ladakh also, if you heard, all they were asking was for
50:31talks to start.
50:32So, all through, it has been about dialogue on the tables. And I was saying right now that elsewhere people
50:41stop dialogue and go with guns.
50:43Here is a place called Ladakh where people are appealing to the government to come to the dialogue discussion table.
50:51And I'm happy that this order says it is for building trust and constructive, meaningful dialogue.
50:59So, that's something that Ladakh has been wanting, where it is a win-win, a mutually satisfactory solution that could
51:09come out.
51:10And if that comes, then where is the need for further agitation?
51:15If that doesn't, then we'll be compelled to take peaceful recourses that we take inspiration from Mahatma Gandhi.
51:25But to take from what Gitanjali just said, the kind of preventive detention you were put under 170 days, does
51:32it have a chilling effect on others who want to raise their voice?
51:36Not necessarily a voice against the state, but a voice for the rights of people.
51:41Do you believe, therefore, that one needs to relook at these laws of preventive detention?
51:46The fact that, you know, you can't just pick up someone and put them in jail for 170 days under
51:52preventive detention.
51:55Definitely.
51:56Definitely.
51:56Definitely.
51:56That was a wrong that I faced, and through me, she, and so many people in Ladakh.
52:06Yes, there needs to be reforms.
52:09I really question the idea of preventive detention also.
52:15You know, most countries don't even have, and it is often misused.
52:19And people who misuse it today, who knows, tomorrow it will be misused against them.
52:25So, perhaps India needs to rethink such draconian laws, where without trial a person can be put.
52:33So, I'm not saying this was great or anything.
52:35Having been through this, I made the most of the time is what I was saying.
52:40But really, we need to look.
52:43Okay.
52:44Okay, there you had Sonam Vangchuk and his wife Gitanjali.
52:48As they say, there are a few brave people that you always need in a society, ready to tell truth
52:55to power.
52:55And as Sonam said, sometimes you have to go to jail for a cause as well.
53:01Thanks for watching.
53:02You stay well.
53:03Stay safe.
53:03Good night.
53:04Shubratri.
53:05Jai Hind.
53:05Namaskar.
53:06That was the news without the noise.
53:08That's still possible even in today's TV times.
53:11Bye for now.
Comments